- Joined
- Oct 20, 2006
Isn't this similar to the deregulation in the financial market?
It won't work. It might stimulate the society for a while, but sooner or later, it will cause trouble. JMO.
Last edited:
Prop 8
- Thread starter Medusa
- Start date
Isn't this similar to the deregulation in the financial market?
It won't work. It might stimulate the society for a while, but sooner or later, it will cause trouble. JMO.
- Joined
- Jul 28, 2003
I guess I do not really see a "problem" that this might cause. Massachusetts was the first state in the country to allow gay marriage, and yet we have the lowest divorce rate in the country
! In fact, traditionally "marriage" has really been a contract between a groom and the bride's father, a largely financial transaction that society had a stock in.
Your arguments are really religion-based, and I therefore do not think much constructive can come out of discussing them - you have your beliefs, I have mine. The only reason, frankly, that I support civil unions over marriage is that it's less contentious, and I do not see this as enough of a civil rights issue to create any more strife in our society.
As long as nobody is forcing me to marry anyone, male or otherwise, I'm fine with it.
! In fact, traditionally "marriage" has really been a contract between a groom and the bride's father, a largely financial transaction that society had a stock in.Your arguments are really religion-based, and I therefore do not think much constructive can come out of discussing them - you have your beliefs, I have mine. The only reason, frankly, that I support civil unions over marriage is that it's less contentious, and I do not see this as enough of a civil rights issue to create any more strife in our society.
As long as nobody is forcing me to marry anyone, male or otherwise, I'm fine with it.
- Joined
- Feb 5, 2004
I'm sorry but there is not a single "accepting" or "repsectful" thing about gays in your post. You accept them but they shouldn't be legally valid? I'd rather you not pay guilty lip service with the first pointless phrase in your post.
Ant
- Joined
- Jul 11, 2003
I believe the basis for anti gay rhetoric is FAITH not FACT. As Oscar Hammerstein II said in South Pacific, "You've got to be taught" because bias is not inherent.
I hope that gay marriage becomes legal in many countries.
I have a friend who is thinking of moving to another country because he has better rights as a gay over there. I am sure that he would be happy there; but I still think it such a big decision to make. He has to leave his own family back home, for example. I also feel that he may be able to earn more back home as he's currently receiving really high income here. Although the quality of life with one's partner is one of the most important elements in life, I feel that he has to sacrifice really a lot in other areas in life.
Another close friend of mine would like to bring his boyfriend to the US to marry so that his boyfriend could work in the US. But this is not gonna happen at least for a while. They are still pretty young so that they have time though.
Psychologically speaking, marriage is often seen as a goal of the dating phase and a start of new family life. Without that defining moment, I would feel a bit less stable and more anxious. I also guess that the lack of legal rights/obligations and of economic advantages in taxes could affect the stability of the commitment.
I know he was vague about this issue during the campaign; but is Obama against gay marriage?
I have a friend who is thinking of moving to another country because he has better rights as a gay over there. I am sure that he would be happy there; but I still think it such a big decision to make. He has to leave his own family back home, for example. I also feel that he may be able to earn more back home as he's currently receiving really high income here. Although the quality of life with one's partner is one of the most important elements in life, I feel that he has to sacrifice really a lot in other areas in life.
Another close friend of mine would like to bring his boyfriend to the US to marry so that his boyfriend could work in the US. But this is not gonna happen at least for a while. They are still pretty young so that they have time though.
Psychologically speaking, marriage is often seen as a goal of the dating phase and a start of new family life. Without that defining moment, I would feel a bit less stable and more anxious. I also guess that the lack of legal rights/obligations and of economic advantages in taxes could affect the stability of the commitment.
I know he was vague about this issue during the campaign; but is Obama against gay marriage?
- Joined
- Jul 26, 2003
It was kind of hard to tell.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=73oZ_pe1MZ8
He said he was for civil unions with all the legal benefits of marriage.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=73oZ_pe1MZ8
He said he was for civil unions with all the legal benefits of marriage.
- Joined
- Oct 20, 2006
Sorry, you are not the only one who knows biology.
What is about 5% of those from biological reasons for being gays (those are the gays that I respect. Of course, no one, even themselves sometimes, know what is real. So it's better to respect them all but not emphasize and encourage it.) has been enlarged by all the irresposible behaviors to make it looks like the base is over 30%. I am worried about the next and next, next generations. It's for sure that we are going to have more and more "gays" in the generations to come if we continue to emphasize it. Those are not the gays from biological reasons, but from confusion and twist of emotions, from disappointments and rejects by the other sex, from the educations in the growing up period.... I truly believe that there are a large number of gays who are not biological gays. You know what? The natural reproductive process will be less and less in this way, and that is against nature which I am talking about.
And "to mind your own business" sort of thinking about it is an irresposible way about the moral issues, which is similar to deregulation in the financial system.
I stated my true believes and thinkings, like you all having been doing. If my way has offended you all, I am sorry.
What a convenient theory. That definitely solves overpopulation problem. Seriously, it is known fact that sexual orientation/identity is biological. "Confusion and twist of emotions" may lead to bi-curious pursuasion, if that is what you are worried about, but I firmly believe it cannot fully change anyone's sexual orientation. Those who "become" gay in response to exposure to gay culture might as well be biological gays who happened to be raised in a heteronormative society.
- Joined
- Oct 31, 2006
- Joined
- Oct 20, 2006
That is only your theory, or I should say "only a theory" on this topic. In the process of exposing to gay culture, I believe that boys are much more vulnerable than girls as in many psychological and genetic fields.
- Joined
- Mar 25, 2008
jennylovskt, I'm sure it's not fun being the only person with an unpopular opinion on a thread. But really, you're pushing theories that have no scientific support. Throughout history, pseudo-scientific explanations have been used to justify discrimination against various groups in society: religious discrimination, sexual discrimination, racial discrimination and so on. Gays happen to be a currently popular target.
If you view homosexuality as wrong based on your faith or values, that's your own affair; I will certainly not tell anyone what to believe. But by arguing that gay people should be denied certain rights, you are forcing your beliefs on others - the very thing you seem to suggest LGBT people are doing. Can you really argue, taking into consideration historical and (sadly) contemporary attitudes regarding homosexuality, that people choose to be gay? Certainly many gay people are happy with who they are, with their identity and their relationships - which I think is wonderful. But homosexuals are still discriminated against in many places, and not accepted fully. It can be very difficult to live one's life out of the closet, which is why so many people remain in it.
I would never suggest religious institutions be compelled to marry gay people. But civil marriage - not some watered down partnership - should be available to gay and straight couples.
As I see it, gay marriage is about two consenting, loving adults wanting to make a lifetime commitment to one another. Why anyone thinks this is a bad thing, or that it reflects on anyone else's marriage, is beyond me.
If you view homosexuality as wrong based on your faith or values, that's your own affair; I will certainly not tell anyone what to believe. But by arguing that gay people should be denied certain rights, you are forcing your beliefs on others - the very thing you seem to suggest LGBT people are doing. Can you really argue, taking into consideration historical and (sadly) contemporary attitudes regarding homosexuality, that people choose to be gay? Certainly many gay people are happy with who they are, with their identity and their relationships - which I think is wonderful. But homosexuals are still discriminated against in many places, and not accepted fully. It can be very difficult to live one's life out of the closet, which is why so many people remain in it.
I would never suggest religious institutions be compelled to marry gay people. But civil marriage - not some watered down partnership - should be available to gay and straight couples.
As I see it, gay marriage is about two consenting, loving adults wanting to make a lifetime commitment to one another. Why anyone thinks this is a bad thing, or that it reflects on anyone else's marriage, is beyond me.
- Joined
- Jun 27, 2003
Marriage is more of a religious term than a civil one... which is why I think there are so many who would vote for civil unions and equal rights, but not the redefinition of a 'marriage'.
I repeat myself, OPEN A BIOLOGY BOOK! That gibberish that you wrote is not biology in any way shape or form!
This is why I think that issues like gay marriage should be decided by the courts and not the general public. The general public is too ignorant to make an informed decision.
I'm so glad I live in Canada where our courts made the decision for us.
- Joined
- Jun 27, 2003
the more I learn about politics and the courts, the more I think the general public is better informed and better educated.
- Joined
- Jul 28, 2003
I am silly in that I actually like democracy...
[size=+2]“Democracy is the worst system of government, except for all the others.” [/size]
[size=+1]
Winston Churchill
[/size]------------------------------------------------------------
Actually, I sort of have to agree with some of what Jenny is saying. I went to school at Mass Art. Being purely heterosexual was just really really uncool there! People "experimented", and "experimented" a lot. Now, I think that most of those who only engaged in homosexual behavior for the sake of experimentation left it at just that - experimentation. However, certainly we're talking here of people who were not biologically wired to be attracted to those of their gender who did take part in homosexual acts. To me personally it's not worse than any other casual sex, but that's another story altogether.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Jun 27, 2003
I agree, even when it doesn't go my way, democracy rocks!
I actually agree with this - but we probably don't agree past that
- Joined
- Jul 11, 2003
Nothing wrong with Democracy if it really allows for equality. It doesn't always.
I do have a lot of trouble liking Capitalism, and in America the two go together like a horse and carriage.
I do have a lot of trouble liking Capitalism, and in America the two go together like a horse and carriage.
- Joined
- Sep 14, 2008
If it's a religious term then it shouldn't be something that is given benefits for by the government. And if rights are to be equal, then there's no need to separate the terms used for two people legally joining their lives together.
And how exactly would that be a bad thing?
There are already too many people on the planet and the World's population only keeps increasing. We need less reproduction, something which homosexuality naturally lends itself to.
You're not truly worried about the well being of the next generations, you're worried about your perceptions being wrong.
- Joined
- Jul 28, 2003
Which system do you prefer?
Democracy and equality is like sun and beach. Sure, it may go together, but there is nothing inherent in one to have the other.
I think it depends on whether or not you have religious beliefs and in which religion you believe. To me, marriage has very little to do with a religious term whereas the funeral does.
